Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 13:36:13 +0900 From: Kenjiro Cho <kjc@csl.sony.co.jp> To: altq@csl.sony.co.jp, akorud@polynet.lviv.ua Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [altq 575] Re[2]: [altq 565] Running ALTQ Message-ID: <20000905133613H.kjc@csl.sony.co.jp> In-Reply-To: <128848740.20000904214214@polynet.lviv.ua> References: <122572553.20000902143543@polynet.lviv.ua> <20000904115035K.kjc@csl.sony.co.jp> <128848740.20000904214214@polynet.lviv.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Andriy Korud wrote: > And few more questions: > 1. What does ALTQ_NOPCC option mean? Will disabling it (using > processor counters) improve limit resolution? It requires only one machine cycle to read a processor cycle couner (timestamp counter for pentium), which is much cheaper than using microtime(). However, it doesn't affect the kernel timer resolution. > 2. When CDRN or HFSC are typically used? I saw something about that > CDRN can limit incoming traffic, is it true? Maybe some references in > Internet? CDNR (traffic conditioners) is a set of mechanisms to meter, mark, or drop incoming traffic. A good starting point would be RFC2475 (An Architecture for Differentiated Services). HFSC (hierachical fair service curve) is a queueing discipline from CMU. http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~hzhang/HFSC/main.html -Kenjiro To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000905133613H.kjc>